Re: [R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Giles wrote: > Thanks for that Gabor, it works fine from the development version > you've pointed to. > > There is in addition a performance issue: the following benchmark ran > in under 0.2s in the previous version, now consistently shows elapsed > time over 14s o

Re: [R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

Thanks for that Gabor, it works fine from the development version you've pointed to. There is in addition a performance issue: the following benchmark ran in under 0.2s in the previous version, now consistently shows elapsed time over 14s on a Xeon with Windows. It's unaffected if I use the devel

Re: [R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Giles wrote: > Hi. > > I'm comparing output from rollapply.zoo, as produced by two versions > of R and package zoo.  I'm illustrating with an example from a R-help > posting 'Zoo - bug ???' dated 2010-07-13. > > My question is not about the first version, or the q

[R] rollapply.zoo() with na.rm=TRUE

Hi. I'm comparing output from rollapply.zoo, as produced by two versions of R and package zoo. I'm illustrating with an example from a R-help posting 'Zoo - bug ???' dated 2010-07-13. My question is not about the first version, or the questions raised in that posting, because the behaviour is as